Ke Qian1,2, Chao-Yuan Tang1,3, Li-Ying Chen1,2, Shuang Zheng1, Yue Zhao1,2, Li-Sha Ma1,2, Li Xu4, Lu-Hui Fan1, Jian-Dong Yu1, Hong-Sheng Tan5, Ya-Lan Sun1, Li-Li Shen1, Yang Lu1, Qi Liu6, Yun Liu7, Yang Xiong1,2. 1. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou 311402, China. 2. Academy of Chinese Medical Science, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou 310053, China. 3. Changxing People's Hospital of Zhejiang, Huzhou 313100, China. 4. The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou 310006, China. 5. Hongqiao International Institute of Medicine, Shanghai Tongren Hospital/Clinical Research Institute, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200025, China. 6. Department of Dermatology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21231, United States. 7. Division of Pharmacoengineering and Molecular Pharmaceutics, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill 27599, North Carolina, United States.
Abstract
Exploring the mechanism through which berberine (Ber) reverses the multidrug resistance (MDR) of breast cancer is of great importance. Herein, we used the methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium assay to determine the drug resistance and cytotoxicity of Ber and doxorubicin (DOX) alone or in combination on the breast cancer cell line MCF-7/DOXFluc. The results showed that Ber could synergistically enhance the inhibitory effect of DOX on tumor cell proliferation in vitro, and the optimal combination ratio was Ber/DOX = 2:1. Using a luciferase reporter assay system combined with the bioluminescence imaging technology, the efflux kinetics of d-luciferin potassium salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated with Ber in vivo was investigated. The results showed that Ber could significantly reduce the efflux of d-luciferin potassium salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells. In addition, western blot and immunohistochemistry experiments showed that the expression of P-glycoprotein (P-gp/ABCB1) and multidrug resistance protein 1 (MRP1/ABCC1) in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells was downregulated upon Ber treatment. Finally, high-performance liquid chromatography was used to investigate the effect of Ber on DOX tissue distribution in vivo, and the results showed that the uptake of DOX in tumor tissues increased significantly when combined with Ber (P < 0.05). Thus, the results illustrated that Ber can reverse MDR by inhibiting the efflux function of ATP-binding cassette transporters and downregulating their expression levels.
Exploring the mechanism through which berberine (Ber) reverses the multidrug resistance (MDR) of breast cancer is of great importance. Herein, we used the methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium assay to determine the drug resistance and cytotoxicity of Ber and doxorubicin (DOX) alone or in combination on the breast cancer cell line MCF-7/DOXFluc. The results showed that Ber could synergistically enhance the inhibitory effect of DOX on tumor cell proliferation in vitro, and the optimal combination ratio was Ber/DOX = 2:1. Using a luciferase reporter assay system combined with the bioluminescence imaging technology, the efflux kinetics of d-luciferin potassium salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated with Ber in vivo was investigated. The results showed that Ber could significantly reduce the efflux of d-luciferin potassium salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells. In addition, western blot and immunohistochemistry experiments showed that the expression of P-glycoprotein (P-gp/ABCB1) and multidrug resistance protein 1 (MRP1/ABCC1) in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells was downregulated upon Ber treatment. Finally, high-performance liquid chromatography was used to investigate the effect of Ber on DOX tissue distribution in vivo, and the results showed that the uptake of DOX in tumor tissues increased significantly when combined with Ber (P < 0.05). Thus, the results illustrated that Ber can reverse MDR by inhibiting the efflux function of ATP-binding cassette transporters and downregulating their expression levels.
Breast cancer is the number one killer of women and is the second-most
prevalent cancer worldwide, accounting for about one-fourth of the
confirmed female cancer cases.[1] At present,
chemotherapy is one of the important means to treat breast cancer.
However, the ability of cancer cells to rapidly develop resistance
to chemotherapy is the major reason for chemotherapy failure.[2−8] Therefore, the study of tumor multidrug resistance (MDR) has become
a major focus within cancer research, with the goal of discovering
a method to reverse MDR. According to current research results, the
possible mechanisms of MDR include high expression of ATP-binding
cassette (ABC) transporters, abnormal enzyme expression, changes in
genes and proteins that control apoptosis, and changes in related
signaling pathways.[9−13] Multiple mechanisms may co-exist at the same time, or the dominant
role may be played by only one mechanism. In recent years, combining
traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) with chemotherapeutic drugs to
combat MDR has been proposed. TCM can act on multiple components of
interest at once, which is likely key to reversing MDR.[14−17]At present, the research on TCM agents used to reverse MDR
cannot
unify the reversal effects observed in vivo and in vitro in tumor cells. It is difficult to establish the
correlation of the research results between in vivo and in vitro because of the different pharmacodynamic
evaluation indexes of drugs. In vitro experiment
drugs directly act on tumor cells; however, the tumor microenvironment in vivo is complex and diverse. Therefore, it is necessary
to find a specific real-time dynamic monitoring technology or method
which could evaluate the drug efficacy on tumor cells, both in vivo and in vitro. Previously, our team
conducted research on the MDR reversal effect of many TCMs in doxorubicin
(DOX)-resistant breast cancer in vitro by a real-time,
quantitative, and dynamic detection method in vitro, and berberine (Ber) was chosen. Ber is an active alkaloid extracted
from medicinal plants such as Coptis chinensis.[18] To investigate whether Ber would keep
the MDR reversal effect in vivo as in vitro and to understand how Ber could reverse MDR, we designed and conducted
this study.Bioluminescence imaging (BLI) is a widely used tool
to study the
biological process of living animals, and it can directly and sensitively
monitor the activity of luciferase gene cells in vivo.[19−22] BLI can integrate the firefly luciferase (Fluc) gene into the chromosomal
DNA of cells to express luciferase. When its exogenous specific substrate,
fluorescein, is added, either directly into the cell culture media in vitro or injected intraperitoneally or intravenously in vivo, luminescence can occur within a few minutes. In
the presence of ATP and oxygen, the enzyme can emit light only in
living cells, and the intensity of light is linearly correlated to
the number of labeled cells. Both cells and living animals can be
labeled with the luciferase gene. With the help of BLI, the activity
of luciferase-expressing cells in vitro or in vivo can be monitored dynamically.d-luciferinpotassium salt is a specific substrate of
the ABC transporter, and its pharmacokinetic (PK) profile in tumor
cells is closely related to the function and/or expression of the
ABC transporter.[23,24]d-luciferinpotassium
salt is also a specific substrate for Fluc. When taken into tumor
cells, it can be oxidized by luciferase expressed by the tumor cells
and then produce photons correlating with the molar amount of luciferin
present. Therefore, this method can dynamically monitor the efflux
of d-luciferin potassium salt in tumor cells in real time,
thus reflecting the dynamic process of the ABC transporter in vitro and in vivo.[25,26]In this study, the MCF-7/DOXFluc cell line with
stably
overexpressed luciferase was established. Using the luciferase reporter
gene system combined with BLI technology, according to the theoretical
support that the PK of d-luciferin potassium salt in tumor
cells is closely related to the function of the ABC transporter, the
PK parameter of d-luciferin potassium salt was evaluated
in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells in vitro and in vivo. In addition, western blot and immunohistochemistry
(IHC) experiments were used to study the effect of Ber on the expression
of ABC protein in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells.
Results and Discussion
Multiple Drug Resistance
of MCF-7/DOXFluc
The cell viability of MCF-7 and
MCF-7/DOXFluc was calculated (Figure A,B). IC50 of 0.55 μg/mL
for MCF-7
and 72.46 μg/mL for MCF-7/DOXFluc, giving a multiple
drug resistance of MCF-7/DOXFluc was 131.75.
Figure 1
(A) Cell viability
of MCF-7, n = 6, x̅ ± s. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
vs the phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) group. (B) Cell viability of
MCF-7/DOXFluc, n = 6, x̅ ± s. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
vs the PBS group. Significant differences were assessed using the t test. Results are presented as means ± SD.
(A) Cell viability
of MCF-7, n = 6, x̅ ± s. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
vs the phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) group. (B) Cell viability of
MCF-7/DOXFluc, n = 6, x̅ ± s. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
vs the PBS group. Significant differences were assessed using the t test. Results are presented as means ± SD.
Combined Treatment of DOX
and Ber Inhibited
the Proliferation of MCF-7/DOXFluc Cells In Vitro
To observe the proliferation rate of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated with DOX and Ber alone or in combination, a synergistic
ratio of DOX and Ber was calculated. When the combination ratios of
Ber and DOX were 1:1, 2:1, 5:1, and 10:1, the IC50 values
after 48 h were 6.6, 3.2, 4.6, and 6.1 μg/mL, respectively,
lower than that of DOX alone (IC50 = 12.6 μg/mL, P < 0.05) and Ber alone (IC50 = 20.0 μg/mL, P < 0.05) (Figure A). The combination index (CI) values were 1.11, 0.51, 0.76,
and 1.70, respectively, and there was statistical difference when
the combination ratios were 2:1 and 5:1 (P < 0.05)
(Figure B). These
findings indicated that Ber could enhance the inhibitory effect of
DOX on cell proliferation through the synergistic effect. The optimal
combinatory ratio of Ber to DOX was 2:1.
Figure 2
(A) MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated by DOX and Ber with
different ratios for 48 h. n = 6, x̅ ± s. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01 vs the DOX group; #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01
vs the Ber group. (B) Synergistic index curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated by DOX and Ber in different ratios for 48 h. (C) Tumor
volumes of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice treated
by DOX (5 mg/kg, i.v.) alone or in combination with
Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.). * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01 vs the PBS group; #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01
vs the DOX group. a: PBS group; b: Ber group; c: DOX group; d: Ber
+ DOX group. (D) Visual observations of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor
volumes in each treatment group at the end time point. (E) BLIrel signal photon–time curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc treated in vivo by different drugs after intraperitoneally
injecting d-luciferin potassium salt at a dose of 10 mg/kg.
(F) Effect of different drugs on the body weight of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01 vs the PBS group. Significant differences
were assessed using one-way ANOVA. Multiple comparisons between the
groups were performed using the Tukey method. Results are presented
as means ± SD.
(A) MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated by DOX and Ber with
different ratios for 48 h. n = 6, x̅ ± s. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01 vs the DOX group; #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01
vs the Ber group. (B) Synergistic index curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated by DOX and Ber in different ratios for 48 h. (C) Tumor
volumes of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice treated
by DOX (5 mg/kg, i.v.) alone or in combination with
Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.). * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01 vs the PBS group; #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01
vs the DOX group. a: PBS group; b: Ber group; c: DOX group; d: Ber
+ DOX group. (D) Visual observations of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor
volumes in each treatment group at the end time point. (E) BLIrel signal photon–time curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc treated in vivo by different drugs after intraperitoneally
injecting d-luciferin potassium salt at a dose of 10 mg/kg.
(F) Effect of different drugs on the body weight of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice. * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01 vs the PBS group. Significant differences
were assessed using one-way ANOVA. Multiple comparisons between the
groups were performed using the Tukey method. Results are presented
as means ± SD.
Combined
Treatment of Ber and DOX Enhanced
the Inhibition of MCF-7/DOXFluc Breast Cancer Xenogeneic
Model In Vivo
The tumor volume in the group
of Ber combined with DOX was smaller than that of other groups (Figure C). Compared with
the PBS group, the group treated with Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.) or DOX (5 mg/kg, i.v.) alone exhibited a mild
reduction of tumor growth, whereas the combination of DOX and Ber
exhibited significant tumor growth inhibition efficiency (P < 0.05) (Figure D). The BLI results showed that the quantity of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells was significantly reduced in the combined group
compared with the PBS group (P < 0.05). The BLI
results showed a decrease in the quantity of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells treated with either Ber alone (10 mg/kg, i.p.) or DOX alone (5 mg/kg, i.v.) compared with the
PBS group, whereas a significant decrease in the quantity of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells was observed after DOX and Ber treatment (P < 0.05) (Figure E). The body weight of nude mice in the DOX group was significantly
reduced, maybe because DOX could cause toxicities and side effects.
After treated by the combination of Ber and DOX, the weight change
of nude mice was similar to that treated by DOX alone (Figure F). It seemed that Ber could
not reverse the toxic side effects of DOX at a high dose (5 mg/kg).
Therefore, the concentration of DOX was decreased from 5 to 2 mg/kg
to observe the synergistic effect and the toxicities in a later experiment.
Ber Could Combine with DOX of Low Dose to
Reduce Toxicity In Vivo
Compared with the
PBS group, the group treated with DOX at a low dose (2 mg/kg, i.v.) alone exhibited a mild reduction of tumor growth,
whereas DOX (2 mg/kg, i.v.) combined with Ber (4
mg/kg, i.p.) produced a significant tumor growth
inhibition effect, which was similar to the treatment with DOX alone
at a high dose (5 mg/kg, i.v.) (P < 0.05) (Figure A). The body weight of nude mice in the DOX group showed a significant
decrease compared with that in the PBS group, whereas the body weight
in the Ber + DOX group showed no significant decrease, indicating
that Ber could reduce the toxicity induced by DOX at a low dose (Figure B). The variation
in tumor mass showed a similar trend (Figure C).
Figure 3
(A) Tumor volumes of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude
mice treated with DOX (5 or 2 mg/kg, i.v.) alone
or DOX (2 mg/kg, i.v.) combined with Ber (4 mg/kg, i.p.). * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group; #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01 vs the DOX group. (B) Body weight of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being treated with DOX or its combination
with Ber. * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group. (C) Tumor
mass of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being
treated with DOX or its combination with Ber. * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group; #P <
0.05, ##P < 0.01 vs the DOX group.
Significant differences were assessed using one-way ANOVA. Multiple
comparisons between the groups were performed using the Tukey method.
Results are presented as means ± SD.
(A) Tumor volumes of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude
mice treated with DOX (5 or 2 mg/kg, i.v.) alone
or DOX (2 mg/kg, i.v.) combined with Ber (4 mg/kg, i.p.). * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group; #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01 vs the DOX group. (B) Body weight of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being treated with DOX or its combination
with Ber. * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group. (C) Tumor
mass of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being
treated with DOX or its combination with Ber. * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group; #P <
0.05, ##P < 0.01 vs the DOX group.
Significant differences were assessed using one-way ANOVA. Multiple
comparisons between the groups were performed using the Tukey method.
Results are presented as means ± SD.
Ber Inhibited the Function of ABC Transporter
in MCF-7/DOXFluc Cells In Vitro
The fluorescence efflux kinetics of d-luciferinpotassium
salt was monitored by BLI in vitro after the MCF-7/DOXFluc cells were treated by Ber for 48 h. The results showed
that Ber could significantly inhibit the efflux of d-luciferinpotassium salt (Figure A). The fluorescence intensity of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells
treated with the ABCB1 inhibitor (Verapamil (Vera), 10 μg/mL)
or Ber in different concentrations (9 and 18 μg/mL) for 48 h
was detected by in vivo imaging system (IVIS). PK
parameters in each group were obtained from the bioluminescent signal
intensity of d-luciferin potassium salt, and the area under
curve (AUC) and mean residence time (MRT) were fitted into the noncompartment
model. The results showed that both Ber and Vera could significantly
increase AUC and decrease MRT (P < 0.001). These
data indicated that Ber could decelerate the clearance and efflux
rate of d-luciferin potassium salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells. It meant that Ber could inhibit the function of the ABC transporter
and thus reduce the efflux (Table ).
Figure 4
(A) BLIrel signal photon–time curve
after being
treated with Ber or Vera for 48 h in vitro. (B) BLIrel signal photon–time curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being treated with Ber for 7 d. (C)
BLIrel signal photon–time curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being treated with Ber for
14 d. (D) BLI of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice
at different time points within 130 min after being intraperitoneally
injected with d-luciferin potassium salt at the dose of 10
mg/kg.
Table 1
Effect of Vera and
Ber on the PK Parameters
of d-Luciferin Potassium Salta
group
t1/2 (min)
MRT (min)
Cmax (×106) (photon/s)
AUC0–120min (×108) photon/s*min
Ber (9 μg/mL)
237.03 ± 53.41
254.59 ± 68.54
6.73 ± 0.24***
6.36 ± 0.13***
Ber (18 μg/mL)
264.79 ± 60.78
270.73 ± 71.61
7.82 ± 0.22***
8.16 ± 0.35***
Vera
480.24 ± 81.58
211.43 ± 90.25
8.03 ± 0.29***
8.33 ± 0.37***
PBS
191.94 ± 49.83
289.41 ± 70.53
3.88 ± 0.30
3.97 ± 0.18
Compared with the
PBS group, * P < 0.05, ** P <
0.01, *** P < 0.001 (x ± s, n = 6).
(A) BLIrel signal photon–time curve
after being
treated with Ber or Vera for 48 h in vitro. (B) BLIrel signal photon–time curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being treated with Ber for 7 d. (C)
BLIrel signal photon–time curve of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after being treated with Ber for
14 d. (D) BLI of MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice
at different time points within 130 min after being intraperitoneally
injected with d-luciferin potassium salt at the dose of 10
mg/kg.Compared with the
PBS group, * P < 0.05, ** P <
0.01, *** P < 0.001 (x ± s, n = 6).
Ber Inhibited the Function of ABC Transporters
in MCF-7/DOXFluc Cells In Vivo
On the 7th and 14th days after receiving Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.), the MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice were injected
with d-luciferin potassium salt (10 μg/mL, i.p.), and the luminescence signal was detected by BLI.
Within 130 min, the bioluminescence signal value of d-luciferinpotassium salt decreased gradually with time, and the bioluminescence
signal of the Ber group was stronger than that of the PBS group (Figure B–D). The
PK parameters were calculated according to the noncompartmental model.
The AUC of the Ber group was higher than that of the PBS group with
lower MRT, which meant that Ber can enhance the uptake of d-luciferin potassium salt by tumor cells and reduce the efflux to
a certain extent (Table ).
Table 2
PK Parameters of Treatment with Ber In Vivoa
MRT
AUC
group
7 d
14 d
7 d
14 d
PBS
45.78 ± 0.41
41.32 ± 0.63
84.40 ± 0.78
98.67 ± 0.52
Ber (10 mg/kg)
37.77 ± 0.52
36.59 ± 0.18
196.15 ± 0.83**
142.34 ± 0.47*
Note: Compared
with the PBS group,
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01.
Note: Compared
with the PBS group,
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01.
Combination
of Ber and DOX Had No Obvious
Toxicity to Main Organs in Mice
The results of histopathological
sections after hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining showed that
the cells of each organ in the PBS group were closely arranged, the
nucleus was complete, the tumor cells were dense, and there was almost
no apoptosis or necrosis. Compared with the PBS group, the gap between
myocardial cells became larger and the cell morphology changed significantly
in the DOX group. The density of nuclei in tumor cells decreased significantly,
and some tumor cells died of apoptosis and necrosis. In the Ber +
DOX group, the morphology of myocardial cells changed significantly
too, which meant that Ber could not reduce the toxic reaction caused
by DOX at a high dose. Fortunately, compared with the DOX group, the
area of apoptosis and necrosis of tumor cells increased and the nuclei
decreased significantly (Figure A).
Figure 5
(A) H&E staining of major tissue and tumor taken from
MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after different treatments
(200×).
Scale bar = 200 μm. (B) Blood biochemical indicators of tumor-bearing
nude mice after different treatments. DOX (5 mg/kg, i.v.) and Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.). * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group. (C) Distribution of DOX in tumor tissue
treated by DOX alone or in combination with Ber after 0.5, 2, and
4 h. Significant differences were assessed using the t test. Results are presented as means ± SD.
(A) H&E staining of major tissue and tumor taken from
MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice after different treatments
(200×).
Scale bar = 200 μm. (B) Blood biochemical indicators of tumor-bearing
nude mice after different treatments. DOX (5 mg/kg, i.v.) and Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.). * P < 0.05 vs the PBS group. (C) Distribution of DOX in tumor tissue
treated by DOX alone or in combination with Ber after 0.5, 2, and
4 h. Significant differences were assessed using the t test. Results are presented as means ± SD.Furthermore, biochemical indexes, such as blood ureanitrogen,
creatinine, alanine amino transaminase, and aspartate transaminase
were also assessed. There were no significant differences among all
groups (Figure B).
Ber Could Increase the Distribution of DOX
in Tumor Tissue
After intravenous injection, the distribution
of DOX in tumor tissues at 0.5, 2, and 4 h was measured by high-performance
liquid chromatography (HPLC). Compared with the DOX group, the Ber
+ DOX group significantly increased DOX uptake at tumor sites after
0.5, 2, and 4 h (Figure C).
Ber Could Reduce the Expression of P-Gp and
MDR Proteins In Vitro and In Vivo
The results of western blot analysis showed that Ber could
downregulate the expression of P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and multidrug
resistance protein 1 (MRP1), which indicated that the ability of Ber
in reversing drug resistance was partly related to the quantity of
key proteins (Figure A,B).
Figure 6
(A) Western blot analysis of P-gp, MRP1 expression. (B) Quantitative
analysis of protein expression of western blot. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 vs the PBS group. (C)
IHC staining of tumor taken from MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing
nude mice after different treatments (200×). Scale bar = 200
μm. P-gp and MRP1 were quantified; a minimum of three randomly
selected sample data were quantitatively analyzed using image J software.
Significant differences were assessed using the t test. Results are presented as means ± SD.
(A) Western blot analysis of P-gp, MRP1 expression. (B) Quantitative
analysis of protein expression of western blot. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 vs the PBS group. (C)
IHC staining of tumor taken from MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing
nude mice after different treatments (200×). Scale bar = 200
μm. P-gp and MRP1 were quantified; a minimum of three randomly
selected sample data were quantitatively analyzed using image J software.
Significant differences were assessed using the t test. Results are presented as means ± SD.The results of IHC experiments showed that the expression of P-gp
and MRP1 in the DOX group was significantly upregulated when compared
with the PBS group, whereas it was significantly downregulated in
the DOX + Ber group (Figure C).The emergence of MDR during chemotherapy is an important
reason
that restricts clinical treatment and leads to chemotherapy failure.
P-gp and MRP1, both of which belong to the ABC transporter family,
can combine with chemotherapeutic drugs and pump intracellular drugs
to extracellular cells based on the energy released by ATP hydrolysis,
thus inducing MDR.[27−30] As an adjuvant drug for chemotherapy, TCM has been proven to be
effective in reversing MDR by downregulating the expression of ABC
transporters in tumor cells. For example, Yanhusuo can effectively
reverse the drug resistance of adriamycin and mitoxantrone by inhibiting
P-gp, reducing MRP1-mediated efflux, and activating ATPase activity.[31] Quercetin can significantly improve the chemotherapy
effect, and its main mechanism is to downregulate the expression of
P-gp and MRP1, increasing the accumulation of DOX in cells and improving
the therapeutic effect of DOX.[32] A lot
of papers reported the MDR reversal ability by Ber, with an emphasis
on its mechanism. For example, Ber could enhance the drug sensitivity
and induce apoptosis of breast cancer through different doses of regulation
of AMPK signaling pathway. A Low-dose Ber could improve the sensitivity
of drug-resistant breast cancer cells to DOX through the AMPK-HIF-1α-P-gp
pathway, whereas a high-dose Ber could directly induce apoptosis through
the AMPK-p53 pathway.[33] Ber could regulate
the expression and function of pgp-170, a gene product of MDR 1, to
weaken the response of digestive tract cancer cells to paclitaxel.[34] Ber was also able to slightly upregulate the
mRNA levels of MDR1a and MDR1b, thereby affecting the expression and
function of MDR proteins.[35] In our research,
the MDR reversing mechanism of Ber was studied from both the function
and the quantity of the ABC transporter protein. In previous studies
related to drug-resistant proteins, people often used flow cytometry
and real-time fluorescence quantitative polymerase chain reaction
to detect the expression level of drug-resistant proteins.[36,37] The advantage of this method is that it can clearly characterize
the cell surface and intracellular protein expression, but it is susceptible
to the influence of fluorescence intensity. The relative difference
of fluorescence intensity depends on the combination difference of
laser and filter on the instrument. Here, with the luciferase reporter
gene system combined with BLI, we established a method for detecting
the ABC transporter substrate content in tumor cells by a real-time
quantitative and dynamical way in vivo and in vitro. To study the efflux function caused by the ABC
protein, Rhodamine 123 was always used as a marker, which could not
be dynamically tracked in real time, especially in vivo. d-luciferinpotassium is a specific substrate for the
ABC transporter. When the intracellular luciferase enzyme is unsaturated,
the bioluminescent intensity will follow a linear correlation with
the content of d-luciferin potassium salt in cells.[38,39] It provides the possibility to establish a relationship between
the pharmacokinetical parameters of fluorescence in vivo and in vitro. Our results showed that, in the Ber
group, there was a positive correlation between the in vitro and in vivo AUC of the fluorescence in tumor cells,
and the Pearson correlation coefficient values were more than 0.7
(P < 0.05) (Table ). This means that the AUC of fluorescence has a strong in vitro–in vivo correlation. Therefore,
it is feasible to screen MDR reversal agents in vitro by using the luciferase reporter gene system combined with BLI.
Table 3
Correlation between Tumor Inhibition
Rate and AUC after Treatment with Ber In Vitro and In Vivo
group
Pearson coefficient
P
Ber
0.968
0.047
Conclusions
In this work, Ber was demonstrated as an ideal MDR reversing agent.
The MDR reversal effect is achieved by inhibiting P-gp and MRP1 functions
and their expression in MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor cells. When
combininging Ber with DOX to treat DOX-resistant breast cancer, Ber
enhanced the intracellular concentration and retention of DOX in tumor
cells, which occurred via facilitating the cellular
drug uptake and reducing the drug efflux rate in MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor cells. The DOX–Ber combination significantly enhanced
the in vivo anticancer efficacy of DOX in a drug-resistant
MCF-7/DOXFluc xenograft model.
Experimental
Section
Materials
DOX was purchased from
Hisun Pfizer (Hangzhou, China). Ber was obtained from Macklin Biochemical
Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China, purity ≥ 97%). Fetal bovine serum
(FBS), penicillin/streptomycin, and trypsin were purchased from Gibco
Corporation (USA); d-luciferin potassium salt was provided
by Science Light Biology Science & Technology Co., Ltd. (Shanghai,
China). Both methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium (MTT) and dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO) were bought from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). Bicinchoninic
acid (BCA) kit and radioimmunoprecipitation assay buffer were purchased
from Beyotime Biotechnology (Shanghai, China). Vera was purchased
from Apexbio (Houston, USA). Primary antibodies such as P-gp/ABCB1,
MRP1/ABCC1, and secondary antibodies were purchased from Abcam Corporation.
All chemicals were of analytical reagent grade.
Cell Lines and Experimental Animals
The MCF-7/DOXhumanbreast cancer cells were kindly provided by West
China Pharmacy School of Sichuan University and routinely cultured
using RMPI 1640 (from Gibco, USA), supplemented with 10% FBS and 1%
penicillin/streptomycin (from Gibco, USA) at 37 °C with 5% CO2 atmosphere in a humidified incubator. The MCF-7/DOXFluc cell line, stably expressing the Fluc reporter gene, was constructed
by lentivirus infection as in our former studies.[39]Female BALB/c nude mice (4 weeks old, weighing 18–22
g) were purchased from Slake Laboratory Animal Company (Shanghai,
China) and bred by Laboratory Animal Center at Zhejiang Chinese Medical
University (Hangzhou, China). To establish the xenograft models, 6
× 107 of MCF-7/DOXFluc cells and Matrigel
(from BD Biosciences, USA) were suspended in PBS at a ratio of 1:1
(v/v) and subcutaneously inoculated on the right side of each mouse.
All procedures involving animal experiments were performed in accordance
with the protocols approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University.
Determination of Multiple Drug Resistance
of MCF-7/DOXFluc
A standard MTT assay was applied
to calculate the multiple drug resistance of MCF-7/DOXFluc. DOX with concentrations of 0.05, 0.10, 0.50, 1.00, and 10.00 μg/mL
was applied to MCF-7, and DOX with concentrations of 0.10, 1.00, 10.00,
50.00, and 100.00 μg/mL was applied to MCF-7/DOXFluc. After incubation at 37 °C for 4 h, the MTT-containing culture
medium was discarded, and then 150 μL of DMSO was added. The
absorbance of each well was read at 490 nm using a microplate reader
(Bio-Tek, USA). Each sample was repeated in triplicate. Cell viability
was calculated by the following equation: cell viability (%) = {(ODsample – ODblank)/(ODcontrol –
ODblank)} × 100%. The tumor cell proliferation rate
and half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) values
were calculated by CompuSyn software. Multiple drug resistance = IC50 of MCF-7/DOXFluc/IC50 of MCF-7.
In Vitro Cell Viability Studies
A standard MTT assay was applied to evaluate the MCF-7/DOXFluc cell cytotoxicity and MDR reversal effect of Ber. MCF-7/DOXFluc cells were seeded into 96-well plates at a density of
8 × 103 cells per well, 24 h prior to drug treatment. In vitro experiments were set up into four groups (PBS group,
DOX group, Ber group, and Ber + DOX group), and each group was set
up with six wells. The DOX-containing culture medium was added to
each well of the DOX group, so that the final concentrations of DOX
were 62.50, 31.25, 16.13, 7.813, 3.906, 1.953, 0.9766, 0.4883, and
0.04883 μg/mL. The Ber-containing culture medium was added to
each well of the Ber group, so that the final concentrations of Ber
were 125.0, 62.50, 31.25, 16.13, 7.813, 3.906, 1.953, 0.9766, and
0.09766 μg/mL. The culture medium containing Ber and DOX was
added to each well of the Ber + DOX group, so that the final concentrations
of DOX were 62.50, 31.25, 16.13, 7.813, 3.906, 1.953, 0.9766, 0.4883,
and 0.04883 μg/mL, and the final concentrations of Ber were
adjusted according to the concentrations of DOX, so that the combined
ratios of Ber and DOX were 10:1, 5:1, 2:1, and 1:1, respectively.
The same volume of culture medium was added to each well in the PBS
group. The CI analysis of Ber combined with DOX based on the Chou
and Talalay method was conducted using CompuSyn software. For the
experimental processing and data analysis, refer to Section .
In Vivo Antitumor Efficacy
and Systemic Toxicity
The xenografts of humanbreast cancer
were used as described in Section . MCF-7/DOXFluc tumor-bearing nude mice
were used to evaluate the tumor inhibition efficacy of the different
concentrations of Ber in combination with DOX. Ber and DOX were dissolved
in PBS. The nude mice were randomized into four groups (n = 6 per group) and treated with PBS, DOX (5 mg/kg, i.v.) alone, Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.) alone, and DOX (5
mg/kg, i.v.) in combination with Ber (10 mg/kg, i.p.). DOX and Ber were administered every other day for
12 days, with a total of six doses. Body weights and tumor volumes
were recorded the day after administration. The tumor length (L) and width (W) were used to calculate
the volume (V), based on the following equation: V = (L × W2 × 1/2). On every second day post administration, 100 μL
of d-luciferin potassium salt (50 mg/kg, dissolved in PBS)
was intraperitoneally injected into each group (PBS group, DOX group,
Ber group, and Ber + DOX group) and immediately imaged by IVIS (Xenogen,
USA) to record the peak value of the fluorescence. The BLI intensity
of in vivo tumor cells was detected at Ex = 328 nm and Em = 533 nm.
At the end of treatment, the tumors and organs (heart, liver, spleen,
lungs, and kidneys) were collected for H&E staining to evaluate
specific toxicity.
In Vivo Monitoring of Body
Weight and Tumor Volume of MCF-7/DOXFluc Tumor-Bearing
Nude Mice Given Low-Dose DOX
Once the tumors in the tumor-bearing
nude mice grew to about 100 mm3, the mice were randomized
into four groups (n = 6 per group) and treated with PBS, DOX (5 mg/kg, i.v.) alone, DOX (2 mg/kg, i.v.) alone,
and DOX (2 mg/kg, i.v.) in combination with Ber (4
mg/kg, i.p.). The drug was administered six times
in succession every other day, during which the body weights and tumor
volumes were recorded every other day. The tumor volume was calculated
using the calculation formula described in Section .
In Vitro Fluorescence Kinetics
of d-Luciferin Potassium Salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc Cell Analysis
To investigate the effect on the function
of ABC transporter-mediated efflux by Ber in vitro, the efflux of d-luciferin potassium salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc cells was noninvasively monitored by BLI in real time
and quantitatively. Our main aim was to use Ber to decrease the MDR
on MCF-7/DOXFluc but not to kill the cells; Ber of 90%
IC50 and 45% IC50 was selected to carry out
the in vitro experiment. MCF-7/DOXFluc cells were inoculated into a 96-well plate with a cell density of
8 × 103 cells per well. After attachment for 24 h,
the cells were treated with Ber at two different concentrations (9
and 18 μg/mL) for another 48 h. Vera (an inhibitor of ABCB1,
10 μg/mL) alone was used as a positive control. Before detection, d-luciferin potassium salt (10 μg/mL) was added to each
well and immediately kinetically imaged using IVIS. Excreted extracellular
signals were captured every 5 min, and the kinetics of d-luciferinpotassium salt was observed within 130 min. The photon signaling intensity
of each group was then normalized by the total protein content as
relative BLI (BLIrel) in order to eliminate the confounding
influence of the increasing cell populations of photon signaling intensity.
The BLIrel versus time curves were plotted. According to
the noncompartment model method, the dynamic parameters (AUC and MRT)
of d-luciferin potassium salt in cells were calculated.
In Vivo Fluorescence Kinetics
of d-Luciferin Potassium Salt in MCF-7/DOXFluc Cell Analysis
The tumor-bearing nude mice were weighed
and intraperitoneally injected with d-luciferinpotassium
salt (10 mg/kg). The BLI signals of each time point were quantitatively
recorded within 130 min to obtain the kinetics of d-luciferinpotassium salt in vivo. The photon signaling intensity
of each time point was normalized by the volume of tumors in each
treatment group and considered as BLIrel. To obtain the
kinetics of d-luciferin potassium salt under the intervention
of Ber (10 mg/kg), the BLI signals were taken at every time point
for 0–130 min by using the IVIS kinetic imaging system after
being treated with Ber at different time points (7 d and 14 d). The
BLI signal was also normalized as above. According to the noncompartment
model method, the dynamic parameters (AUC and MRT) of d-luciferinpotassium salt in cells were calculated.
Expression
of P-Gp and MRP1 Proteins by Western
Blot Analysis In Vitro
MCF-7/DOXFluc cells were inoculated into a 10 cm tissue culture dish with a cell
density of 4 × 106 cells/mL. The culture medium containing
Ber with different concentrations (9 and 18 μg/mL) was given.
After 48 h, all cells were washed twice with ice-cold PBS, centrifuged
at 14,000 rpm for 15 min, and all supernatants were discarded. A volume
of 100 μL of cell lysis buffer containing Protease Inhibitor
Cocktail was added to the precipitate and incubated on ice for 30
min, then centrifuged at 14,000 rpm for 15 min, and all supernatant
was sucked. The protein concentration of cells in the supernatant
was determined by BCA assay. A volume of 50 μL of supernatant
was taken from each group, added to 5× protein loading buffer,
boiled at 100 °C for 5 min, and run on 8% SDS-PAGE gel, and then
the protein was transferred from the gel to the PVDF membrane. TBS-T
(1×) was used to prepare 5% nonfat milk, and the cell membrane
was sealed for 1 h. At 4 °C, it was incubated with primary antibodies
(P-gp and MRP1 antibodies) overnight. The membrane was washed three
times with 1× TBS-T and then incubated with secondary antibodies
(HRP Affini pure goat antirabbit IgG) for 2 h at room temperature.
The quantitative analysis of western blot results was conducted using
image J software.
Expression of P-Gp and
MRP1 Proteins by IHC In Vivo
All tumor tissues
were stored with 4% paraformaldehyde
and embedded in paraffin. The sections were deparaffinized in xylene
and then hydrated with gradient ethanol. The antigen was recovered
by microwave heating. The sections were incubated with 3% hydrogen
peroxide (H2O2) for 30 min at room temperature
to eliminate the activity of endogenous peroxidase. The sections were
incubated with 10% normal goat serum for 30 min at room temperature.
The sections were incubated with primary antibodies (P-gp and MPR1)
overnight at 4 °C. After washing with TBS three times, the sections
were incubated with labeled polymer-HRP antimouse (DAKO) secondary
antibody for 1 h at room temperature. The sections were then exposed
to 3, 3′-diaminobenzidine tetrahydrochloride solution and counterstained
with hematoxylin.
In Vivo Distribution of
DOX
The tumor-bearing nude mice were randomly assigned into
two groups (DOX group and Ber + DOX group) (DOX dose of 5 mg/kg, i.v., Ber dose of 10 mg/kg, i.p.). Before
the experiment, the tumor-bearing nude mice in each group fasted for
12 h and drank water freely. The tumor-bearing nude mice were separately
euthanized at 0.5, 2, and 4 h after treatment, and the tumor tissues
of each group were excised, rinsed with 0 °C saline, and dried
using a filter paper. The tumor weights were measured and recorded.
The tissue samples were homogenized in saline (0.25 g/mL) in an ice
bath. Then, 0.5 mL of the homogenate was taken from each tumor tissue
and placed in a 1.5 mL centrifuge tube. The samples were extracted
with 2 mL of methanol–chloroform (1:4, v/v) mixed solution,
vortexed for 5 min, centrifuged at 14,000 rpm for 5 min, and the supernatant
was harvested and transferred to a clean tube. The supernatant was
dried under nitrogen at room temperature. A volume of 100 μL
methanol–chloroform (1:4, v/v) was used to resuspend the sample.
The sample was then vortexed for 2 min and centrifuged at 14,000 rpm
for 5 min. The supernatant was collected, and the DOX concentration
was measured by HPLC (Waters, USA).
Statistical
Analysis
Statistical
analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0 software. Data are represented
as mean ± SD. The statistical analysis was determined using one-way
ANOVA or the t test. Multiple comparison between
the groups was performed using the Tukey method. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, #P < 0.05, and ##P < 0.01
were considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.
Authors: Raie T Bekele; Ganesh Venkatraman; Rong-Zong Liu; Xiaoyun Tang; Si Mi; Matthew G K Benesch; John R Mackey; Roseline Godbout; Jonathan M Curtis; Todd P W McMullen; David N Brindley Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Zhen Chen; Karin A Vallega; Haiying Chen; Jia Zhou; Suresh S Ramalingam; Shi-Yong Sun Journal: Pharmacol Res Date: 2021-11-24 Impact factor: 7.658
Authors: Muhammad Naeem; Muhammad Omer Iqbal; Humaira Khan; Muhammad Masood Ahmed; Muhammad Farooq; Muhammad Moeen Aadil; Mohamad Ikhwan Jamaludin; Abu Hazafa; Wan-Chi Tsai Journal: Molecules Date: 2022-05-25 Impact factor: 4.927